Mark Souder

Mr. SOUDER

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, the manager's amendment makes technical and conforming changes to account for changes in the law within the jurisdiction of those committees that waived formal business meetings on H.R. 2829, the Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 2005. On page 145, the manager's amendment strikes the mandatory restrictions on certification of budgets related to enforcement in certain contexts of section 484(r)(1) of the Higher Education Act, more popularly known as the Drug-Free Student Loan provision. The provision made students convicted of drug offenses temporarily not eligible to receive student loans. However, a significant problem had arisen in the Department of Education, beginning during the Clinton administration and continuing during the current administration, because they have misinterpreted the clear language of that statute to improperly deny loans to students whose drug convictions predated their enrollment in school. Section 8021 of the Deficit Reduction Act, Public Law 109-171, signed into law on February 8, 2006, contained language that altered the interpretation of a provision included in the Higher Education Act, and therefore obviated the need to address this matter in H.R. 2829. The manager's amendment changes made on pages 149, 187, and 217 and the related conforming amendments are based on technical recommendations made by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence through the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. The technical amendments were thought desirable to make the ONDCP authorization reflect changes made by the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, Public Law 108-458, and related authorizations. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my distinguished colleague from Ohio on the Judiciary Committee for his great work on this and so many other issues, on constitutional issues and on crime issues in this country, and I want to put this amendment a little bit in context. First, we have a very strong Meth Caucus in this House, led by Congressman Larsen, Congresswoman Boswell, Congressman Calvert, and Congressman Cannon. Congressman Calvert was one of the early leaders because in California we saw these super labs, just like in Washington State and Oregon. Actually, they started in Hawaii. Moved from Asia into Hawaii, into the west coast, into the Plaines, then into the Great Lakes States. It has now moved through the whole country. Part of the reason the Meth Caucus is so frustrated and you will see so many amendments today, and even in the overriding bill, is because of an exasperation that while this is tearing up the grass roots, the Congress of Counties in the United States has said it is the number one drug problem in America; we have the HIDTAs coming in and saying it is, State and local law enforcement coming in and saying it is, the emergency rooms reflecting that, yet there has been no coordinated anti-meth strategy. The challenge we have when we do a bill like this, which is a 5-year bill, which may mean at different times that oxycontin may be the problem, crack is in other cities and heroin is in other cities, that you try not to micromanage any particular drug in a 5-year bill. But what has happened here is, because the Office of ONDCP in particular, as well as HHS for the most part, have had a tin ear and not responded, this bill is going to have a lot more micromanagement in it than you normally would in a 5-year authorization. I believe methamphetamine will be around in 5 years. I don't believe we are going to get rid of it in 5 years. It originally was in the form of crack and was not that widespread. But as it spread, whether it is mom-and-pop labs or crystal meth, it will be here for 5 years. But this would not be necessary if they already had a clearinghouse. I can't believe we don't already have a clearinghouse. It wouldn't be necessary if we already had in the schools different programs like this amendment is prescribing. The administration this morning said they oppose this bill because it ties their hands too much. I am sorry, when you do not respond to the crisis in America, when the American people are rising up in every county, every law enforcement organization, this is exactly what we need to do in legislation when you do not respond. I strongly support this amendment and I hope the entire Congress will support this amendment.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, we will include for the Record a series of letters that we have written to Secretary Leavitt. One of the panels on this conference was: We Do Not Need a War on Methamphetamine. Another title was: You Don't Have to Be Clean and Sober or Even Want to Be. Sexual topics were also there. Harm Reduction: Tweaking Tips For Party Boys; Barebacking: A Harm Reduction Approach Without Condoms; Harm Reduction: Unprotected Sex, Gay Men and Barebacking. It was awful, done with our tax dollars. But what is particularly outrageous, when we look at narcotics, is how can our Department of HHS be participating in something named ``We Don't Need a War on Methamphetamine.'' That is why we are asking ONDCP to investigate this.

Mr. SOUDER. Yes, I am acting as his designee.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, there are a couple of comments I want to make in closing general debate here. One is, just for the record, though it is not part of this legislation, we have clearly corrected the misinterpretation of the student loan bill. The Clinton administration had falsely interpreted the House legislation. The Bush administration continued to do that. It has been corrected. You only lose a student loan if you commit a drug crime while you have the loan. That is the least that the taxpayers should expect; and even then, if you go to drug treatment and test clean, you can get your loan back. Even then, if you get convicted, not arrested, but convicted of a drug crime, you still can get it back after 2 years, or if you go through drug treatment and get clean. The third time after you commit a drug crime and get convicted, then you lose your student loan. This is the least that the taxpayers should expect. We also have this constant debate whether it is a war or a disease. Former drug czar Barry McCaffrey always said he felt it was both, and I agree. Because with heart disease you do not see doctors getting assassinated on the street. You do not see heart surgeons getting shot in deals about heart surgery. Also it is a controllable disease. You do not have the equivalent of Alcoholics Anonymous or narcotics anonymous for Alzheimer's. But it is a disease. That is why treatment is very important. That is why the prevention programs are very important. I appreciated Congressman Pascrell, and actually it was Congressman Cummings who first said that narcoterrorism is something that we live with every day. As I said earlier, tragically, 3,500 people were killed on 9/11. But that fall, 7,500 died because of illegal narcotics; 30,000 in 2002; 30,000 in 2003; 30,000 in 2004; roughly 7,500 in the first quarter of this year 105,000 people have died. While we get obsessed with every little thing going on in homeland security, we have terror on our streets, in our homes, and in our neighborhoods every day. We cannot forget and divert funds from the daily threat of narcoterrorism in the United States as we do this. I want to again refer to the Government Reform Subcommittee report that was unanimously adopted today. You can find it on the Web site of the Criminal Justice Subcommittee under Government Reform, 154 pages, 607 footnotes. If you tap the footnote, you can get the actual source. There you can get a full view of the whole narcotics policies, whether it is in HHS, Department of Justice, Defense, State Department. It is part of what we do in our committee. The ONDCP, the direct bill in front of us, has two major functions. One is directly under the control of the so-called drug czar, the director of ONDCP. It is a national media campaign, the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas, and the Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center. In addition, the drug czar reviews all budgets of all agencies with narcotics and has broad authority to make sure that we have a coordinated national drug policy, and this bill strengthens that. This bill was not easily put together. I want to thank first off the Members of both parties. We have had an extraordinary working relationship and have become very close friends, Mr. Cummings and I, but other members of our committee, too. We have had well-attended subcommittee hearings. We have held field hearings as well as hearings in Washington. Our staff, particularly Nick Coleman, who has just recently left to go to the U.S. Attorney's Office, has visited almost every HIDTA in America. We as Members have visited HIDTA directors here and have gone out and visited the different HIDTAs. Marc Wheat, the staff director; Dennis Kilcoyne; Jim Kaiser; Tony Haywood from the minority staff have worked hard in developing this comprehensive legislation. Mr. Cummings and I both thank our staff, because they help make us look good. In a bill this complicated, working with every agency in the Federal Government basically, in a bipartisan way, is not easy to do. Mr. Chairman, I urge all Members to support this legislation.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I do not oppose this amendment. It is an excellent amendment. It requires ONDCP in 90 days to come up with a comprehensive strategy addressing the threat of methamphetamine. In this bill we already require a coordinated strategy to combat South American and Afghan heroin, which we have not had. We already require a Southwest border narcotics strategy, which has not been effective. But there has been nothing on meth, and this not only requires a strategy for the supply side, how it gets in internationally through the border, but the demand side as well. The National Ad Campaign has basically been absent, part of the ONDCP, on the meth issue; yet we have reduced the funding here. But this House clearly showed they would increase the funding on the National Ad Campaign if they put it in meth, and then they wonder why they cannot get more dollars for the National Ad Campaign. We have had to do meth hot spots to try to address that at the grass- roots. That was opposed by the administration. We have now authorized that as part of the terrorism bill in the Combat Meth Act. An amazing individual in the State of Montana has put together a private sector program that is more effective in fighting meth than we have been able to come up with in the public sector. This amendment will help direct and force the Department of ONDCP, the drug czar's office, to address in a coordinated way meth strategy. I commend the gentlewoman from Oregon. The Portland Oregonian has been a champion nationally and internationally in identifying this. She has championed this issue in Oregon; as well Congressman Walden in the eastern side of Oregon that has been hit so hard; and we really appreciate all the efforts of those in the Northwest as this drug rips through the rest of the country, into Congressman Peterson of Pennsylvania's district. Titusville, Pennsylvania is the capital of meth in Pennsylvania, ripping into North Carolina. We are doing a hearing with Congressman McHenry in the next few weeks. As we see it march into the East, this has now become a national problem; and we appreciate the leadership from the Northwest. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings).

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I have some serious reservations with this amendment, not with the goals, but whether many of these studies are not already being conducted. We have tried to work with the gentlewoman from Texas to sort that through. I have agreed to support this amendment and accept this amendment on the condition that we will continue to work in conference and to the degree there is not duplication, because I agree with two fundamental underlying points. One is that we have seen a rise in drug use among girls and women; in methamphetamine in particular we have seen a startling rise. Secondly, in our prisons, we need to continue to look at that. I believe there are a number of private sector studies in addition to what ONDCP does that will reach much of that data. But I share her goals, and will continue to work in conference to do that. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings).

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry).

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that each side be given an additional 2 minutes.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings).

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I think Mr. Cummings' point is a fitting conclusion as we move to the end of this debate. Our frustration is that since there has not been an authorization, the director of ONDCP has proposed a number of changes which would greatly undermine what this Congress intended. When we set up the High Intensity Drug Trafficking programs, the HIDTA, it was meant initially to focus on the Southwest border, which has not been particularly effective. In case anybody noticed, we do not have great control there, partly because we do not have an integrated Southwest border strategy. We have starts, we have a Southwest border HIDTA, but we need a Southwest border strategy. In these High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas, we move to the biggest cities and say, this is how the drugs come in and move into Indiana from Chicago and Detroit. You need the Baltimore-Washington HIDTA and the Los Angeles HIDTA, the Phoenix and the Houston HIDTAs behind the border. Other States then saw the effectiveness. What made HIDTA effective? The idea was if the Federal Government tried to do everything through DEA, FBI, Coast Guard, Border Patrol, Customs, it would not work. Sometimes even our Federal agents were arresting each other, and we were not getting integrated with State and local law enforcement. So the goal in HIDTA was if we put a 1 million, $2 million into an area, first off, we would require all of the Federal agents to be there and they would get half the votes, and then we would get the States and locals and they would get half the votes, and they would feel actual ownership of it. If they felt ownership, they would participate. As the head of the Phoenix Police Department told us at a hearing, it was moved over to OCDETF. It has done wonderful work, but OCDETF talks to supposedly State and local law enforcement, but State and local law enforcement do not get a vote. So they get put on a board, and they come to a meeting once in a while. HIDTA actually gives them a vote. The head of the Phoenix Police Department said his city council asks him on a regular basis, can you justify this, can you justify that. He has kept three officers in the HIDTA because he sees how that HIDTA money gets leveraged with the State police, with the U.S. Attorney's Office, with the U.S. Marshals, with the FBI, DEA, and with everybody else. Why, when we finally get a program that works at the State and local levels that leverages these dollars, would we gut it without even talking to the people involved? The Phoenix police chairman said he would pull his three officers out of the narcotics effort if it was moved. So did Chicago. So did city after city. And it is so exasperating that they continue to persist on this. But it shows it has done a great job of educating the HIDTAs. The New York City HIDTA is integrated completely with terrorism, and it is an amazing operation as we see those to links occur. The national ad campaign we are addressing throughout this bill because we think it has been effective and we need to make it more effective, and it needs to include meth. The administration was also proposing dramatic changes to the technology center. It is one of the most valuable things to State and local law enforcement because not only do we give them goods, but it is a model for what we are trying to do on homeland security, that is, when a police department says I would like this kind of radio, night goggle, protective gear, they analyze it. In my district, take Albion, 1,500, Kendallville is 10,000 people, Fort Wayne is 230,000 people. They can go through their list and say we would like these goggles, but then it goes through a review process and they say this is probably not what you need in Albion. Unless you can make a defense, you don't get that. You have to submit what kind of drug challenges you have, what types of things you need, and the Technology Assessment Center then, off of your list, you match up what your departments need. Everybody in homeland security gets this pool of money, and now they have all kinds of things that they may not ever need and mismatches. Now we are trying to have the State say, what is your homeland security plan; to have the locals say, what is your homeland security plan. Then in a technology center, we should have it work like in the drug czar's office, except the drug czar wants to get rid of his own Department. It is baffling why there is this persistent goal in the administration to wipe out the things that most benefit State and local and keep the parts that are nationally under their control. So I think this bill will comprehensively address a whole series of those concerns. I am pleased that we have been able to do this. The Meth Caucus has been bipartisan; this subcommittee has been bipartisan with Mr. Cummings and the full active membership of subcommittee. We have all been able to bring a bill forth and move through the full committee unanimously. Judiciary, Energy and Commerce, Education, and Intelligence committees all participated in this process, individual Members with their amendments as well as the Meth Caucus. I hope this bill will receive unanimous support. Three of the amendments we need a ``yes'' on. There is one amendment that would get rid of ONDCP, and I urge a ``no'' vote on that.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I do not oppose this amendment and we are willing to accept this amendment. This amendment seeks to strengthen the bill by highlighting the problem of methamphetamine. I think it is very important that this House continue to go on record every day possible, every amendment possible. Again, the gentleman from Washington has been the founder of the Meth Caucus and Congressman Larsen, Congressman Cannon, and Congressman Calvert in the Meth Caucus have been active in doing this. I think it is important to look at an international summit. Clearly, as we dealt with the major methamphetamine bill that is part of the antiterrorism bill, we realize that as we get control of pseudoephedrine behind the counter, this becomes much more of an international problem. In Oklahoma, which was the first State, really, to enact tough legislation, they have seen crystal meth come in behind and become a scourge on their State. We see it in Oregon and Washington, other States around the country. As you crack down on the so-called ``mom and pop labs'' and the ``Nazi labs'' you move to crystal meth. That is better for local law enforcement but bad for the individuals because it is even more potent. Crystal meth is coming from an international market. It started over in Asia. There are nine basic facilities in the world, the Czech Republic has closed theirs, but Germany as well as China and India. Much of it comes across our border from Mexico, and without cooperation on an international basis, without working with the U.N. antinarcotics efforts, we cannot tackle this in the United States. We have attempted to put up walls in the Combat Meth Act. We had things for the spot market. We had new measuring things and so on, but ultimately that is just trying to put up a wall around the United States. We have to figure out how we are going to cooperatively work with India, China, and Mexico and other countries. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings).

Mr. SOUDER. Reclaiming the balance of my time, as Mr. Cummings just said, this shows the diversity of things that we tackle in our committee, in narcotics areas across the United States. We saw new shocking revelations yesterday on Barry Bonds. Masking agents are increasingly a challenge in trying to deal with steroids and other vitamin supplements and things that people are using in excess quantities to create artificial advantages in competition. How this thing goes down to young people whose bodies cannot handle this, as we heard in our steroids hearing, watching OxyContin, which is one of the most effective painkillers being used by people, taking people's lives, and it becomes a way that people rob banks and pharmacies and violence in society, abuse of other prescription drugs. In addition to cocaine, heroin, methamphetamines, different areas will have different things come up at different times. But we need to know the science behind it. We need to know how it affects the human brain. We need to know the best ways to fight this. We need comprehensive efforts. That is what the Office of National Drug Control Policy is supposed to do. I commend the gentleman and support this amendment from the gentleman from Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, Congressman Lee Terry brought this amendment to the Rules Committee, and I strongly support this amendment. One of the things I should point out is that this has been an unusual day. We have been asking for some time to be able to have a meth day. Clearly, this has turned into a meth day, as well as when we did the terrorism bill. We had methamphetamines as part of that. And the reason is because we are hearing from the grass roots and they want to tackle the methamphetamine issue. Earlier today, interestingly, we had the Meth Caucus and others who were not able to come to the floor because there was a major press conference with DEA and other agencies to talk about the bill that we passed earlier this week, the largest methamphetamine act in the United States' history as part of the terrorism bill. And Mr. Terry and other Members, including Coach Osborne and others who come to the floor regularly on meth, are over at the White House for the signing ceremony on the methamphetamine bill. So I have been here on the floor today, and some Members have been able to make it over, but this has been a meth day and beyond on the House floor, and it is meth day at the White House as well as throughout Capitol Hill. This particular amendment directs the director of ONDCP, the ``drug czar'' to consult with the head of each major national organization that represents law enforcement officers, agencies, or associations. That would include, for example, Ron Brooks of the National Narcotics Officers Associations Coalition, the Fraternal Order of Police, the national HIDTA directors. He must consult them prior to making recommendations to the President on national budget for drug control enforcement each year. So why would we need this kind of amendment in this bill? I would think that this is what the director does for a living. But when we had a hearing and asked why the HIDTAs were being moved to the Justice Department at this hearing, we had the director of the narcotics officers who said they hadn't been consulted. We had the director of the Chicago HIDTA, the Speaker's HIDTA, and he said he hadn't been consulted. We had the directors of the Southwest border HIDTA, and they said they had not been consulted. We had the director of the Baltimore- Washington HIDTA, and he said he had not been consulted. We had the director of the Missouri HIDTA, the sheriff of our Whip Roy Blunt's home area, and he said he had never been consulted. The question is: Who did they consult? If they didn't consult the HIDTA directors, any of them, if they didn't consult the narcotics officers, if they didn't consult the police officers, on what grounds are they making recommendations to in effect gut these programs and move them to other departments? On what grounds are they proposing to wipe out the Byrne grants and the drug czar be silent or actually supportive? On what grounds are they proposing to wipe out the meth hot spots? I think it would be just basic good procedure that the director would talk to these groups before he would make these recommendations. Yet all these groups say he has never had a meeting with them. He is not meeting with them before he makes these recommendations. I think, quite frankly, it is a sad day when the United States Congress has to put into a bill that the director meets with the people who are on the street fighting the drug war, which he should be doing as part of his job. But I strongly commend Mr. Terry for this amendment, because we need the director. If we are going to have a director, a drug czar who is going to make recommendations that impact State and local law enforcement all over the country, that impact our HIDTAs all over the country, we ought to at least know, and he can still make whatever recommendations he wants, and the President can still make whatever recommendations he wants, but we would like to know before that recommendation comes over that he has at least talked to the people doing the job at the grassroots level. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that each side be given 5 additional minutes.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Texas to close.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.

Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, I submit these letters to further illustrate the matter raised by Mr. Graves. House of Representatives, Committee on Government Reform, Washington, DC, August 12, 2005. Hon. Michael O. Leavitt, Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC. It has been my understanding, from several sources, that the Department of Health and Human Services has been the principal barrier preventing the Administration from formulating a policy to address the methamphetamine epidemic. And now I have learned that the Department of Health and Human Services is a primary sponsor of a conference controlled by the Harm Reduction Coalition and the Harm Reduction Project in your home state of Utah, on August 19 and 20, 2005. I find this all to be deeply offensive. I am enormously frustrated with your Department for dithering on the meth issue while the rest of America fights an epidemic that is viciously tearing apart families and communities throughout the country. A foundational premise of the so-called ``harm reduction'' ideology promoted at the HHS-sponsored conference is that we should not be fighting a ``war on drugs,'' but rather limiting drugs' harmful effects. Harm reduction is, in fact, a vehicle drug legalization proponents have hijacked to pave the way to their ultimate objective. Any claim that your Department is unaware of the pro- legalization agenda and ``soft'' approach to illegal narcotics of the harm reduction advocates is utterly implausible. This agenda is readily apparent from the conference topics sprinkled throughout the program, as well as the very websites of the assorted harm reduction organizations sponsoring and participating in the conference. Shockingly, Major Session IV of the HHS-sponsored Harm Reduction Coalition and Harm Reduction Project conference next week is entitled, ``We Don't Need a `War' on Methamphetamine.'' Other conference topics include, ``You Don't Have to Be Clean & Sober. Or Even Want to Be!'' and sexual topics consistent with the harm reduction ideology that shuns an abstinence-based approach for at-risk communities: ``Tweaking Tips for Party Boys,'' and two sessions on engaging in sex without condoms, ``Barebacking: A Harm Reduction Approach,'' and ``Without Condoms: Harm Reduction, Unprotected Sex, Gay Men and Barebacking. Among the speakers and moderators at this conference sponsored by your Department, five are identified in the program as representatives of the Drug Policy Alliance, giving seven presentations at the conference. The Drug Policy Alliance describes itself as ``the nation's leading organization working to end the war on drugs.'' Along with its major donor George Soros, the Drug Policy Alliance helped produce It's Just a Plant, a pro-marijuana children's book. Marsha Rosenbaum, who is also presenting at the HHS-sponsored conference, wrote the epilogue for this disturbing book. Both the Harm Reduction Coalition and the Harm Reduction Project are partners with the Drug Policy Alliance for its upcoming 2005 International Drug Policy Reform Conference. According to the Alliance's conference materials regarding who should attend this meeting: ``Anyone who believes the war on drugs is doing more harm than good!'' The program for the HHS-sponsored conference next week also includes a ``Special Thank You'' to a handful of people, including HHS employee Dr. Glen Hanson, of the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). As you know, NIDA's mission is ``to lead the Nation in bringing the power of science to bear on drug abuse and addiction.'' To what end is the Department's goal to ``lead the nation'' with harm reduction and drug legalization partners? Luciano Colonna, Executive Director of the Harm Reduction Project and host of the DHHS-sponsored conference, and one reported as briefing your aides in advance of the conference, is quoted as stating that, ``For a lot of people, meth use is a rite of passage and it really does increase sexual pleasure.'' That Administration officials from your Department are consulting with harm reduction advocates such as Colonna, and sponsoring conferences controlled by the harm reduction network, completely undermines the work of the President, the Congress, and the men and women who work in law enforcement across the nation who are trying desperately to fight the meth epidemic. Please provide the following materials no later than 5:00 p.m. Tuesday, August 16, 2005: (1) An official statement of why the Department of Health and Human Services is sponsoring the August 19-20 Harm Reduction conference in Salt Lake City, and how such participation furthers the Administration's stated goal of reducing drug use. (2) The names of all Department of Health and Human Services staff attending the August 19-20 Harm Reduction conference in Salt Lake City, and their contact information so we may conduct staff interviews. Please provide the following materials no later than 5:00 p.m. Friday, August 26, 2005: (1) All documents relating to the Department of Health and Human Services' involvement, including its role as a primary sponsor, for the August 19-20 Harm Reduction conference in Salt Lake City. See the attachment for a full definition of ``documents'' and ``relating to.'' Mr. Secretary, I have steadily worked for enhanced treatment and prevention funding and expanded treatment options. I was the House sponsor of the Drug Addiction Treatment Expansion Act just signed by President Bush. Treatment and prevention are not the issue here. The issue is that the Administration has not yet put forth a strategy to address the meth epidemic, and your Department bears much of the responsibility for that failure. To procrastinate further while supporting the very people who advocate relaxed drug laws is unconscionable. Sincerely, Mark E. Souder, Chairman, Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy and Human Resources, Government Reform Committee.